[Tiara]

Originally posted by Stealth

you say:

Basic examply of moronism and twisting my words. Instead of pouring money in having a trial against a ****ing 12 year old use the money kick some thief into jail instead. An adult thief that can actually hurt people.

[Tiara]

Originally posted by Stealth


do some research... a $2000 fine is next to nothing...  public prosecution i'll admit is not right because of her age, but the punishment i don't think there's anything wrong with

FOR A 12 YEAR OLD CHILD. And 2000 dollars can be a helluva ****ing lot for a normal family. A lot of people can't afford it you know.

I soooo hope they crash on your roof with a big ass lawsuit and rip your wallet and bank account empty just for me to see how you like it.

[Stealth]

FOR A 12 YEAR OLD CHILD. And 2000 dollars can be a helluva ****ing lot for a normal family. A lot of people can't afford it you know.

I soooo hope they crash on your roof with a big ass lawsuit and rip your wallet and bank account empty just for me to see how you like it

a fine's not supposed to be easy to pay!  $2000 is NOTHING for a fine!

[Charlotte]

Stealth, you are such a moron

You twist everything she says just to suit your needs. She doesn't even mean anything close to that. If you even had 2 braincells you'd see that.

Now, admins, you can close this

[Stealth]

i'm not twisting everything... look at her posts and you'll see that one second she's saying:

Prosecuting children... sheez... Deal with the real ****ing criminals first. Like murderers and drug dealers and ****. Put your money in that, not going after little girls. Its pathetic.

next minute she's saying

I never said she shouldn't be punished. But 2000 dollar fine and a public prosecution is just too much for a 12 year old.

so we go from "don't prosecute at all" to "yeah, prosecute, but not to that degree"

[Stealth]

Stealth, you are such a moron  

You twist everything she says just to suit your needs. She doesn't even mean anything close to that. If you even had 2 braincells you'd see that.

Now, admins, you can close this

what she's saying is the 12 year old girl shouldn't be prosecuted, because of her age... that they should go for people older.  that's wrong, there's no exceptions based on age in this case...  if she's old enough to download illegally, she's old enough to take responsibility for her actions.

i do agree that making this public and humiliating is wrong in her case, but the punishment is not


EDIT:  And before this thread gets closed... i'd like to say that the RIAA has been warning about taking action for MONTHS... there's no excuse... it doesn't matter if it's a 12 year old girl or a 80 year old man in a wheelchair... if he/she continues downloading illegally, what do you think they should do?  "warn" them?  they've BEEN warning for the last 4 or 5 months!

[Charlotte]

No what she's saying is that resources can be put to better use then prosecuting little girls. Murderes, thiefs, etc should have a higher priority then those who download a, nSync album. And T is sitting right next to me so I know it.

I 100% agree with her. If the RIAA wants to be effective go squander money somewhere else. Otherwise they should shut their craphole.

[Stealth]

well i agree with that too, yes, perhaps the government's resources should go into murderers, rapists, etc. but remember the RIAA isn't concerned with these other violators of the law... it's only meant to find people illegally sharing files online (as far as i've heard)... so its resources are going ONLY into finding these people, not into finding murderers, thieves, rapists, drug dealers, etc.

[Zeronet]

Originally posted by Charlotte
No what she's saying is that resources can be put to better use then prosecuting little girls. Murderes, thiefs, etc should have a higher priority then those who download a, nSync album. And T is sitting right next to me so I know it.

I 100% agree with her. If the RIAA wants to be effective go squander money somewhere else. Otherwise they should shut their craphole.

Of course you agree 100% with her.

[Stealth]

everyone's entitled to their opinion (obviously) on this matter...

i just think the fact she's 12 years old should have nothing to do with the punishment (fine).  i do think it's wrong to make her the object of public humiliation, and getting the media involved and stuff.

[01010]

Originally posted by Stealth
well i agree with that too, yes, perhaps the government's resources should go into murderers, rapists, etc. but remember the RIAA isn't concerned with these other violators of the law... it's only meant to find people illegally sharing files online (as far as i've heard)... so its resources are going ONLY into finding these people, not into finding murderers, thieves, rapists, drug dealers, etc.

Also tying up YOUR legal system and so preventing YOUR country from prosecuting serious criminals quickly. Christ, I don't even live in America and I seem to have more of a grasp on what's going on.

[Stealth]

okay binary, i never said it wouldn't slow down the legal system... that's obvious, so i'm glad you figured that out .

but you can't expect the RIAA to use their resources for something else (like finding REAL criminals) because they're not geared for, or sponsored to do that.

[Martinus]

[color=66ff00]Wow that turned ugly fast.

I'd like to point out that by buying CD's you are not really helping out your favourite bands, you mainly help out the middle men and the RIAA.

Copy the damn CD and send the band £10, cheaper than the CD and the band makes probably 1000% more than what they might have got through 'legit' channels.

This springs to mind


[/color]

[Stealth]

lol Maeg

we never said that this whole effort's helping artists

[Kamikaze]

On this particular point, why does it make any difference what age the person is? I doubt anyone would care much if she was say, 50 years old. I mean, that's like discrimination.  

12 year olds typically are more vulnerable to humiliation and don't have resources to wage a legal war , and they make ideal targets for the RIAA. It is they who are discriminating, I haven't seen much media coverage of "56 year old geek gets caught in file sharing". That's not a particularly desirable act, though I'm pretty sure there's no law against it...

Anyhow, much of my concern is that the RIAA isn't learning that a significant portion of its consumer base isn't too happy with the system, or not acting on it. They're being stubborn and continuing to do despicable acts. That's why I'm encouraging people to listen to/support independent/non-RIAA/free music (it seems the RIAA will continue to the bitter end)


BTW: http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/03/09/10/2222214.shtml?tid=123&tid=141&tid=188&tid=99

[WMCoolmon]

The RIAA seems to be abiding by the Tarkin doctrine - "Fear will keep the local filesharers in line. Fear of this lawsuit."


So, does anyone have $2 million lying around to fund Snapster?

[redsniper]

Originally posted by Ashrak
1 americans are retards and stupid ****ing morons with some exceptions

:gives a one finger salute:
The RIAA doesn't represent the american people. ass

[Solatar]

Originally posted by redsniper

:gives a one finger salute:
don't let the RIAA represent every American citizen, asshole.

ditto,  I'd respond to Ashrak's post myself, but I don't feel like being banned...

[Ace]

Originally posted by WMCoolmon
The RIAA seems to be abiding by the Tarkin doctrine - "Fear will keep the local filesharers in line. Fear of this lawsuit."


So, does anyone have $2 million lying around to fund Snapster?

When I get the cash...

[Knight Templar]

Lets see.. If Stealth ran for govenor of California...

1) All PCs would be replaced with hot pink I-Macs...

2) School busses would have Hydraulics and Subwoofers , with Jay-Z and Beyonce on repeat.

3) All websites would be based in flash, and would be totally awesome. badass

4) 12-year-old children around the country will be prosecuted for J-walking and sharing music over the internet.
-------------------------------------------

Phear...